ML20133G257
| ML20133G257 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 12/17/1996 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133G251 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-82-12, NUDOCS 9701150265 | |
| Download: ML20133G257 (2) | |
Text
-
furoq
[
k UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISMON t
b f
WASHINGTON, D.C. So66H001 l
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS.186 AND 169 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY i
J SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 j
DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated August 27, 1996, as supplemented October 24, 1996, the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. I and 2, Technical Specifications (TSs).
The requested changes would delete License Condition 2.C.(24)(a) for Unit 2 which required establishment by June 3, 1981, of regularly scheduled 8-hour shifts without reliance on routine use of overtime.
The requested change would also revise TS 6.2.2 for both units to delete the reference to Generic Letter 82-12 and require that administrative controls be established which will ensure that adequate shift coverage is maintained without heavy use of overtime for individuals. The October 24, 1996, letter provided clarifying information that did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination nor the original notice.
2.0 EVALUATION On February 11, 1982, the NRC published in the Federal Reaister (47 FR 7352),
the " Policy on Factors Causing Fatigue of Operating Personnel at Nuclear Reactors."
In June 1982, the NRC revised the policy and subsequently disseminated the revision in Generic Letter 82-12, " Nuclear Plant Staff Working Hours," which recommended that licensees incorporate specific working hour limits in plant TSs to minimize the potential for personnel errors resulting from fatigue.
The staff subsequently determined that few events at U.S. nuclear plants have been attributed to inadequate control of working hours and that control of working hours through administrative procedures provides reasonable assurance that personnel overtime will not jeopardize safe plant operation.
Control of overtime through administrative procedures is consistent with Action Item I.A.I.3.1, " Limit Overtime," of NUREG-0737,
" Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements," dated November 1980.
Specific working hour limits are not otherwise required to be included in the TSs under 10 CFR 50.36(c)(5).
9701150265 961217 PDR ADOCK 05000272 p
l !
The staff concludes that the specific controls for working hours of reactor plant staff can be described in a licensee's procedure that requires a deliberate decision making process to minimize the potential for impaired personnel performance, and that a licensee's established procedure control processes will provide sufficient control for changes to that procedure.
Accordingly, the staff finds the proposed deletion of the Unit 2 license condition specifying 8-hour shifts, and the proposed amendments to the Unit 1 l
and 2 TSs that require administrative controls to limit working hours to be acceptable.
The second paragraph of the proposed revision to TS Section 6.2.2.d for j
Units 1 and 2 contained a typographical error. The word " designed" should be j
" designee".
The TSs issued with these amendments contain the correct word,
" designee," in TS 6.2.2.d for both units.
This was discussed with the licensee and it agreed to the change.
4 4
j
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
i i
In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the New Jersey State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no coments.
i
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
I The amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or i
administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement j
or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
D. Desaulniers Date:
December 17, 1996 i
I